|
Post by sussexscooterhead on Aug 19, 2007 21:39:21 GMT -5
Mark,
DO NOT REMOVE 2 ROLLERS!!
It's 3 or nothing, you will cause the variator to be severely out of balance by removing anything other than 3.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 19, 2007 21:43:10 GMT -5
I am assuming that you are dropping the wts significantly, otherwise why do it?. Therefore dropping from 26 to 21 (non koehler mod) is a loss of 5 x 6 = 30 grams, (koehler mod) = 15 grams. or a 23 gram wts. The reflex K-mod removes 3 18 gram wts for a loss of 36 grams, but there is a loss at the top end, but a great improvement in acceleration and performance through the bands. I'm doing it for better acceleration during two-up riding mostly but it will be welcome riding single too. I want a little better snap. I don't want to do wheelies, burn rubber, set the quarter mile on fire. I'm looking to tweak, not make massive changes. However, I don't want to totally ruin my fuel mileage or top speed. I need to be able to do 50 MPH for a max of a 2 mile stretch so If I can't find the threshold weight I guess I'm going to have to compromise on something, probably speed. I really wish I had a tachometer now! Can you show me these bands. I can't find them on my scooter.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 19, 2007 21:45:20 GMT -5
Mark, DO NOT REMOVE 2 ROLLERS!! It's 3 or nothing, you will cause the variator to be severely out of balance by removing anything other than 3. I have to disagree. I'll take two opposing rollers out. If I remove one roller, leave two, remove one, leave two it will still be balanced. Doesn't that make sense?
|
|
|
Post by sussexscooterhead on Aug 19, 2007 21:53:12 GMT -5
I can only speak for the variator in my scooter and the one's I've seen for sale online but in any that I've seen the rollers are not organized in a way that will allow for removing only 2.
Maybe yours has something different but I kind of doubt it.
Picture a wheel that is divided into thirds. In each third is 2 rollers along the outer circumference. If you remove 1 and leave 2 and remove 1 and leave 2 you will end up with 2 rollers in one piece of the wheel and 1 roller in each of the other two pieces. Not good.
I know that just sounds like a lot of mumbo jumbo but it will make sense once you have the variator in front of you.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 19, 2007 22:09:49 GMT -5
SSH
If that is the case, and I suspect you are right, then I won't do it. If it allows me the option I'll us it. I feel I would have caught that but thanks for the heads up!
That being the case I think 3 will be to many. I guess only doing it will let me know. Man, I wish I had a tach!
|
|
|
Post by brycegtx on Aug 19, 2007 22:11:50 GMT -5
Jacine and ssh, you are both pretty much right. You can sometimes reduce maximum speed with lighter weights or increase speed with lighter weights.
You have to be careful when you say that maximum speed is reached with full shift in the CVT. Often times, maximum speed is reached with less than full shift in the CVT. So heavier weights may reduce maximum speed.
In order to reach maximum speed with your scoot, your engine peak HP point must align with with maximum speed of the scoot. This point may not be at full shift depending on the gearing. We all have seen cars that will not reach maximum speed in over drive.
So if we want to get our scoot to maximum achievable speed requires a careful selection of weights. A weight too heavy might reduce the speed. A weight to light might reduce the speed. This all assumes that the scoot is over geared as we might expect. I know our MC54 is over geared.
So we can easily see that too light a weight will reduce speed if the CVT does not make it to the ideal point. And conversly, too heavy weights can cause the maximum speed to drop if the scoot cannot pull the gearing.
On the other hand, if you are tuning for maximum acceleration, you will pretty much ignore top speed and tune (typically) for peak engine HP during acceleration. However, you might not like the way this bike drives around town.
Although the marker on the primary will tell you that the primary has reached full shift, it does not tell you that the primary has reached full shift at maximum speed. The CVT will reach full shift at part throttle at lower speeds, which erases the marker.
The best way to determine what the CVT is doing is to compare the engine speed (tachometer) to the bike speed (speedometer). Bryce
|
|
|
Post by sussexscooterhead on Aug 19, 2007 22:16:22 GMT -5
Perhaps, Jacine, you can paste up an article explaining why heavier rollers makes a scooter go faster?
We've been debating the opposite effect but how 'bout switching things around, how does adding more mass to a spinning object cause it to spin faster? MRP says it does, so it must be so!
And if heavier rollers yield more speed can I just keep adding weight until I reach 80mph? Maybe even 90?
|
|
|
Post by thelawnmowerman on Aug 19, 2007 22:36:11 GMT -5
Ok Sussex and Jacine, I gave a lot of thought to this and and I think that both of you are right to a point. I think that these scoots put more then enough pressure on the variator at a reasonable rpm to put it into "top gear"regardless of the weights that we use. Jacine's theory would come into play if you made the weights sooooooooooo light(ex.1gram) that it took 12000 rpm or more to push the variator in via centrifugal force Did I explain myself correctly and am I wrong???
Another example I can give is that say I'm cruising at 55mph at 8000rpms and I still have a little throttle left ... the bike is in "TOP GEAR" at this point, the only thing thats going to make me go faster is not the "gear" that its in, but my rpms. Say I can go 65mph @9000rpms with lighter rollers that push the variator all the way in...I will still do 65mph @ 9000rpms with heavier rollers because both bikes will still be in top gear at that rpm
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 19, 2007 22:57:48 GMT -5
I try to keep my mouth shut but I can't. 17gr for a GY6 is way out of line and I have to wonder if your weight scale is maybe a little out of whack. Stan is the man and I'm with him on the 12's or maybe even 11's. I think stock on most GY6's is 13. Before you start jumping through hoops on this, I'd suggest a trip to a post office with a friendly person who will weigh the rollers for you. I just know they can't be 17's. Good Lord, it would take you 22 minutes to get from 0 to 30.
|
|
|
Post by Jacine on Aug 19, 2007 23:37:24 GMT -5
Lawn thats correct. So if you use lighter wts and in order to get to 55 you need 8500 rpms then you only have 500 rpms until you hit the limiter. So that 500 may not get you to 65 at 9000 rpms but slightly less. The function involves rpms with time. If you use heavier rollers an attain 55 at 8000 rpms, then the 1000 rpms may get you 65. However if the rollers get too heavy and the variator has reached max potential at 7000 rpms, there is not enough power behind those rpms to accelerate properly (turn the gears) and time will be lengthened with the max speed decreasing. Engine power is also still a factor.
A number of italian racing bikes use the malossi racing 2000 variator which has extended ramps and a modified secondary plate which increase the time for the wts to reach outermost position, and effectively add another gear. Although this increases the speed and maintains the acceleration, the bike is still limited by the max output of the engine. They also use a cdi that removes the rev limiter, but this will eventually require rebuilding of the engine.
As for the 17gm wts. that would be approx 24 extra grams which would definitely affect accel. Unless the dealer was looking to boost his max speed they are not likely to be 17 gm.
|
|
|
Post by bob on Aug 19, 2007 23:54:24 GMT -5
My 2005 Bandit DC150z came stock with 17 gm weights. I weighed them at the post office and at a friends house. I changed them to sliding 14 gm weights and used a Dr Pulley variator and I picked up 2 mph at 500 RPMs less. Speed measured with a GPS.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by thelawnmowerman on Aug 20, 2007 0:02:09 GMT -5
what I'm saying jacine, is that regardless of the roller weight that as long as your weights allow the variator to be fully extended for instance @9000rpm or earlier, is that 9000rpm will always equal 65mph in our theoretical scoot because the engine power would not change at 9000 and neither will the gear. Top gear is top gear and at this point the engine would not know the difference between 10gram weights and 100 gram weights.If we hit top gear at a lower speed the engine will take a little more time but IT WILL GET THERE. Just like sussex said about car transmissions. Lets say you shift into 6th gear at 35 mph..boy its gonna take some time but YOU WILL eventually reach the same top end even if you had shifted into 6th gear at 55mph or 85 or 105. You cant say I'm wrong here,I'll smite myself and put up the white flag if you do. All adjusting the weights does(within reason) is determine when, NOT IF you get to top gear. Unless you use feather weights or something(exaggerating of course) Just curious tell me what would happen if we put weights in our aforementioned scoot so that the variator were to close completely(top gear) @5000 then put weights for it to completely close @ 6000 how do you think this would affect top speed. I'm betting that both bikes would eventually reach the same speed at the same rpm
I think your theory comes into play when the roller weights are so light that the engine can never rev fast enough to close the variator and from what I'm learning is that these variators will close within our rpm range regardless of 9 gram to infinity. the only variable is how fast you get there and to find the sweet spot
Just because you take some weight out, doesnt mean you took so much that you cant get to top gear and thus reduced your top speed
|
|
|
Post by Dennis D on Aug 20, 2007 12:51:41 GMT -5
I think that if you decrease the weights by too much, you will begin to limit the conditions under which it is possible to hit top speed, ie: slight inclines, or going into even a modest headwind. So for practical purposes, even though you could see the same top speed under optimal conditions, for useful and practical purposes, your top speed would be limited.
|
|
|
Post by YellowScooter on Aug 20, 2007 13:06:41 GMT -5
My 2005 Bandit DC150z came stock with 17 gm weights. I weighed them at the post office and at a friends house. I changed them to sliding 14 gm weights and used a Dr Pulley variator and I picked up 2 mph at 500 RPMs less. Speed measured with a GPS. Bob With the dr. pulley and cdi/coil, I got a gain up top too . about 9mph worth on a slope with the throttle near twisted off.. On a flat, more like 5mph reliably.
|
|
|
Post by stiffsixman on Aug 20, 2007 17:11:07 GMT -5
I pulled my stock variator yesterday and weighed a roller at the hardware store. It read .04 lbs. which converts to 18 grams. This is a regular ol' 150 gy6.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 20, 2007 18:32:06 GMT -5
I try to keep my mouth shut but I can't. 17gr for a GY6 is way out of line and I have to wonder if your weight scale is maybe a little out of whack. Stan is the man and I'm with him on the 12's or maybe even 11's. I think stock on most GY6's is 13. Before you start jumping through hoops on this, I'd suggest a trip to a post office with a friendly person who will weigh the rollers for you. I just know they can't be 17's. Good Lord, it would take you 22 minutes to get from 0 to 30. Dawg I weighed then on an electronic post office scale. They weight 3.7 oz for six and .6 oz for one. Converting .6 oz comes out to 17 grams. Sad but true.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 20, 2007 18:37:59 GMT -5
SSH
I was thinking about the variator last night. You are correct in that 2 would throw it out of whack. They are in pairs kind of like a peace sign due to the slides that the halves slide on.
I have spent all day dinking with my scooter and nothing has gone right. Parts won't work, parts scratched, et cetera. I marked the variator and will ride it tonight or tomorrow depending on when I get it all back together. From my observation the belt goes completely to the top on mine. It is shiny to the outer edge.
If I leave only three 17 gram weights that will be 51 grams total weight. I don't think that will be enough. I could be wrong. I guess the speed and marks will tell the story.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 20, 2007 20:30:23 GMT -5
I just know they can't be 17's. Good Lord, it would take you 22 minutes to get from 0 to 30. It takes off okay but hits a wall at 15-20 MPH. Then it picks up good again at 40-45 mph. I thought it was valves but they are in spec. It has to be these heavy weights. If I weighed 100# they may be okay. But I'm leaving too much RPM on the table I think.
|
|
|
Post by loudest143 on Aug 20, 2007 21:40:46 GMT -5
Excellent thread! You guys(and grrrl) managed to solve nothing, offer no information based on fact, and in the process killed 9 hours of riding time. L for love!
Loudest143 *it's raining here, that's why i'm posting
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 20, 2007 22:37:46 GMT -5
Excellent thread! You guys(and grrrl) managed to solve nothing, offer no information based on fact, and in the process killed 9 hours of riding time. L for love! Loudest143 *it's raining here, that's why i'm posting Did you have something to say? You have contributed zilch. People have posted based on their results. I'd say that is fact.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 20, 2007 23:43:25 GMT -5
Experiment number one is completed.
I pulled the CVT cover off and marked my front pulley. The belt does not go completely to the outer edge. It leaves about 1/8" of unused pulley face.
I did a little non-scientific speed test. Stock (six 17gram rollers)--Top speed against the wind produced and indicated 51 mph. With the wind produced 56 mph. This is what I've been seeing lately so it was valid.
For the most part I have to give nearly full throttle on take off to get enough speed quickly as to not cause instability or balance issues. If I'm riding two-up it's always a WFO throttle position until I get a little speed. Then I can let off if I need to. BTW I'm not balance impaired and race off-road motorcycles on a regular basis.
Next I pulled the extremely hot CVT cover. It's unbelievable how hot the CVT cover gets in short order. I was burning my fingers thru gloves! (I can see a vented cover in my future for the dry/hot season). I removed three of the rollers. I went from a total weight of 102 grams to 51 grams. Having removed 50% of the weight I expected good acceleration, way too many RPM and a significant reduction in top speed. Here's what I found.
I did have better acceleration. It wasn't pull the front wheel off the ground, spin the tire or rip your arms out of their sockets, but it was markedly better.
I don't have a tachometer so my experiment only uses my hearing. I was carrying considerably more RPMs at any given time. Too much for my tastes. I'm sure fuel economy would suffer greatly. The RPMs at 40 mph sounded like what I normally hear at 50 mph. This is by sound only and not verifiable. I have no idea what the top speed RPM was compared to stock. It really didn't sound all that different than stock but that is not a conclusive testing method.
This is the part SSH and Jacine are salivating to read. ;D Time for another speed run on the same roads. Conditions were roughly the same although I believe the wind may have been a touch more but I have no real way of confirming that. Against the wind I had an indicated 51 mph. Against the wind I hit 58 mph! This can't be. Well there was an 18-wheeler a good bit ahead of me and I may have been in some dirty air allowing a bogus top speed. So I turned around and did it again. Into the wind I achieved 51 mph, with the wind was 55-56 mph. I only lost 1 mph and nothing really significant as I had suspected.
The end result was better than I had hoped for yet less than I hoped for. I went to an extremely light roller weight. It was the equivalent of running six 8.5 gram rollers. Although the acceleration was decent I think some heavier rollers will use some torque to propel me down the road, not just RPM. I never had the feeling of the scooter pulling me forward. It made noise and went forward but didn't feel all that enthusiastic (if that makes any sense).
I'm curious as to the markings on the front pulley. Will they be the same as before meaning these weights are enough to shift the CVT into top gear or will there be more markings meaning I'm pulling more RPM to achieve the same speed? I suspect the later.
I'm very interested in doing some two-up riding tomorrow and see if the scooter is easier to ride as I suspect. I'm sure of one thing, I won't need to do WFO takeoffs to get us moving! That will be really nice. It will make zipping along with traffic much better too.
I will get several set of rollers and do some more testing in the future when I get time. I think I'll get a set of 10s and 12s. Those will give me roughly 20%, 35% and 45% more weight than I have now (51 grams). I can also combine three 10s and three 17s for the equivalent of 13.5 gram rollers. Then I'll get some DR. Pulley sliding rollers in the desired weight. After that I may even buy the DR. Pulley variator. Oh, I need to buy a tachometer too!
I've done the testing, posted my results. I welcome civil discussion.
|
|
|
Post by swampsniper on Aug 20, 2007 23:43:40 GMT -5
I am assuming that you are dropping the wts significantly, otherwise why do it?. Therefore dropping from 26 to 21 (non koehler mod) is a loss of 5 x 6 = 30 grams, (koehler mod) = 15 grams. or a 23 gram wts. The reflex K-mod removes 3 18 gram wts for a loss of 36 grams, but there is a loss at the top end, but a great improvement in acceleration and performance through the bands. I'm doing it for better acceleration during two-up riding mostly but it will be welcome riding single too. I want a little better snap. I don't want to do wheelies, burn rubber, set the quarter mile on fire. I'm looking to tweak, not make massive changes. However, I don't want to totally ruin my fuel mileage or top speed. I need to be able to do 50 MPH for a max of a 2 mile stretch so If I can't find the threshold weight I guess I'm going to have to compromise on something, probably speed. I really wish I had a tachometer now! Can you show me these bands. I can't find them on my scooter. Power "bands" are not parts you can see, they are mandated and controlled by the laws of physics, pressures, vacuums,BTUs, and Isaac Newton watching falling apples! ;D It is all about levers and fulcrums, and other basic sh!t! I grew up hooked on "Mr. Wizards Science Secrets", when MTV was still an unimaginable waste of time. I'm gonna shut up, maybe you should too, and listen!
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 20, 2007 23:49:06 GMT -5
I'm gonna shut up, maybe you should too, and listen! What exactly is it you want me to listen to Bob? She wanted to know why I would want to change my roller weights so I told her. I tried to lighten the atmosphere with the powerbands comment as it seemed to be getting into a pissing contest. Why should I shut up since it is my thread and I was asking the questions? Oh yeah, what was it you wanted me to listen to again?
|
|
|
Post by loudest143 on Aug 21, 2007 5:20:39 GMT -5
MLN, until your last large post, only bryce had added anything of worth. It was all subjective, situational, and nothing based on a scientific process. Your last post, where you took your bike through some experimental steps. Your experiment is much closer to fact. However, you need to add some other factors as you relate your factual data to the rest of us. Rider weight, as mass is important as related to velocity. Also define your road conditions.... Are you traveling on new, less than 5 year old asphalt? Concrete? What altitude are you performing your test at? All of these factors will be important to each of us as we perform similar experiments in our own regions, states and cities.
You and Jacine were arguing early on in this thread about stuff that you each kinda sorta felt were perceiving as definitely could have probably happened. weak. Your last post hammered your thoughts and opinions home with authority scientific data, and I'm guessing, no cut and paste.
LMO * ain't freedom of speech a beautiful thing?
|
|
|
Post by Dennis D on Aug 21, 2007 7:15:15 GMT -5
Loudest, are you a self appointed critic of the relative worth of other people's opinions and experiences, or are you just another common troll? Man by nature is a creature with limited knowledge and all any of us can do is tell our subjective opinions based on our own results and feelings about them. Exactly what MLN has done. Just because the other posters didn't have there experiences that they based their opinions on yesterday, doesn't make them any less valid. Opinions are by nature subjective, and to say there's nothing subjective about a "scientific test" where the rpm figures are a guess pulled out of the air, is pure hogwash.
Until you jumped in here everyone was contributing based on their own experiments and experiences and information thy've collected over a long period of time. Most didn't just get introduced to this subject yesterday. Now, since you know so well what should comprise a proper test and all the criteria that should go into it to make it scientific.... I guess that would make you the most qualified person(in your subjective opinion) to do such a test. Since you fancy yourself as the most objective judge of the worth of other people's contributions.... surely you could gather the resources and give us the most objective test any of us have ever seen on this subject so we wouldn't have to pool our experiences and conjectures about what's really been going on when we've made weight changes. Please collect the weights, the instruments, the studies on pavement types, and whatever else is necessary to meet Loudests criteria for a scientific test, do the testing, and enlighten us! Until then your opinions on the validity of other people's contributions to this thread are just so much BS, apparently not even based on your own subjective experiences.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 21, 2007 9:12:44 GMT -5
Loudest
No cut and paste. I did the testing.
I clearly stated in the very beginning that my tests were non-scientific. I was merely passing on the outcome of my efforts. I know what it takes to get quantitative results and honestly, I didn't want to spend the time as the outcome for me would be the same. My only option at the moment is to remove 3 rollers. If you want to do a full blown test be my guest, I'll look forward to reading about your testing methods and results.
About the conditions, not that it matters, as I gave the baseline and modified results. Scooter- RC-150z, tire pressures F/R 34/36 Nitrogen filled, full tank.
Rider- 210#
Road conditions- Asphalt less than 5 years old. relatively flat. No, I did not do slope calculations for the road test area.
Atmospheric conditions- Temp 86*F, Humidity 68%, BARO 29.74 and rising, Winds 12mph
Now that you have the info just how is that going to help you in your test area?
Yes, freedom of speech is grand. I spent 24 years defending that right.
|
|
|
Post by Jacine on Aug 21, 2007 10:41:40 GMT -5
I didn't say that you would loose significant top end, just 2 - 3 mph. Considering the variables of wind etc that you tested with, a 1 mph loss + or - seems to verify the results.
For those who are unfamiliar with the Koehler mod, the process was credited to Bruce Koehler specifically for the Honda Reflex. The Reflex has a set of 3 black and 3 brown rollers set in an alternating pattern. The Brown are 18 grams and I forget what the black are, but they are heavier. The mod involves removing the 3 brown rollers and just using the black for a much improved performance on the Reflex. According to Bruce, Honda overweighted the variator deliberately in order to improve EPA performance testing at the low end and in effect disabling faster acceleration through the low and mid range.
|
|
|
Post by MLN on Aug 21, 2007 14:26:56 GMT -5
Jacine
I was the one who expected a significant loss in speed. However I made a very major change in roller weight so I expected it. My results didn't back that up surprisingly. In your first post you were rather matter of fact that I was going to lose speed, end of story. Later you made it sound like it would be a waste of time to optimize the roller weights weights because I could expect a 2-3 MPH loss.
I've always been in the frame of mind to tweak for better overall performance, not drag race results. I only removed the 3 rollers because of all the varying opinions around here. I just wanted to see what would happen. Having actually tested, it instead of sitting around wondering about it, I am now 100% certain that I will be able to tweak the weights and have increased acceleration without a loss of top speed. I also learned that I do not like a scoot that is tuned as such (although many probably would) . I will be happy somewhere on the middle ground.
Thanks to you and SSH I have some practical experience now. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Dennis D on Aug 21, 2007 14:47:56 GMT -5
I don't see as anyone should be viewed as right or wrong here. If we were talking about identical bikes, in the same tune, same set of final gears, same sized variator, and riders of identical weight, each with the willingness to push the bikes to the same degree in order to wring the last single mph of speed out of them, then we could definitively arrive at an answer as to exactly what changes in weights will do. But I believe there are as many possibilities as there are differences in power curves of engines, gearing, and riders. The problem is we're not comparing apples to apples. Even stock, there are bound to be differences in the power curves of various manufacturers' GY6 engines, differences in weight and in final gearing. At least as far as I'm aware of, none of us has dyno tested our scoots, and very few people on this forum even knows what the final gears in their gearboxes are. Then throw in people who have swapped out their variators, others who are talking about totally different size and displacement scooters than what this forum is intended for, and what we're left with as universal truthes for changing variator weights, is necessarily going to be a couple of fairly vague generalities. Each may person may give their own experiences, every one is likely to be somewhat different, and even the most meticulous testing method wouldn't make any one of them the definitive anwer, universally applicable to all situations.
That's what makes tuning for performance so interesting. Every machine and the way it's used is different. We can learn the possibilities from one another if we listen and don't view experiences that seem to contradict our experiences as any more or less valid. We'll only find out what works for our own bike by trying different things, based on what seems like it might fit our situation and usage. Few of us continue trying different things enough to really get a complete picture, even for our own unique situation, because when we find a combination that comes close enough to what we had in mind for a goal, we usually stop. Even if we didn't, change just one or two things, and our results might not apply at all to someone else's machine.
|
|
|
Post by brycegtx on Aug 21, 2007 17:07:04 GMT -5
Jacine I was the one who expected a significant loss in speed. However I made a very major change in roller weight so I expected it. My results didn't back that up surprisingly. In your first post you were rather matter of fact that I was going to lose speed, end of story. Later you made it sound like it would be a waste of time to optimize the roller weights weights because I could expect a 2-3 MPH loss. I've always been in the frame of mind to tweak for better overall performance, not drag race results. I only removed the 3 rollers because of all the varying opinions around here. I just wanted to see what would happen. Having actually tested, it instead of sitting around wondering about it, I am now 100% certain that I will be able to tweak the weights and have increased acceleration without a loss of top speed. I also learned that I do not like a scoot that is tuned as such (although many probably would) . I will be happy somewhere on the middle ground. Thanks to you and SSH I have some practical experience now. Thanks! 1) Unfortuenately, we do not know what happened with your tuning because we don't have tachometer readings. For all we know, the engine just ran higher RPMs with the lighter weights. 2) The other possiblity is that the engine RPMs were the same because the primary was fully shifted in both cases. We need a tachometer to confirm this. If it was number 1, then you can get both higher speed and higher acceleration (compared to the original weights) with weights between what you picked. If it was number 2, then it does not matter what weights you use, you will never get a higher speed. As I said in my previous post, you need both a tachometer and a speedometer to tell you what is happening. Although the mark on the primary is good to determine if you make it to full shift at some point. Not making it to full shift can be a sign of a worn belt, too short a belt, weights too light.... Bryce
|
|